Canadian Federal Politics Thread v5

[PepsiFree]

Originally Posted by shotinthebacklund

Give me a break Pepsi, You and many others have repeatedly attacked PP for being unlikable, Punchable, whiny, wiener , joke, etc... these are you issues not policy driven issues. You dont like his policy or approach to policy fine, I get that. However, in this context we are talking as a person not a politician just as the context of Leblanc.

You dont have to like PP, no problem there, but dont sit on your side and call out the other for doing the same thing you have been doing for years.

Yeah, I think you’re missing the point. It’s not about the label, it’s about whether you can substantiate it.

If I call PP a moron, I can illustrate why I think he’s a moron (his inability to engage beyond quips and his proposed economic policies).

If someone thinks Leblanc is a moron, go ahead and call him that. But gosh, you’d hope to be smart enough yourself to do better than “I dunno I don’t like his friends.”

Seems pretty straightforward. But maybe you’re just extra bubbling this morning.

[Azure]

Originally Posted by shotinthebacklund

Broke ethics laws giving a lucrative fishing license to his wifes cousin during his time as minister of fisheries


He wreaks of the same egotistical smugness as his leader and close friend

He is 100% complicit in much of the corruption seizing our government and exactly what we should be looking to cut out.

Trudeaus Childhood baby sitter and it looks like maybe that never ended, now they just call him the government "Fixer"

Like I said, friend of the Irving family.

[Azure]

Originally Posted by Fuzz

https://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/leb...ence-1.4820213

OK, just read about that, and he graciously accepted the findings, that also said there was no benefit as well. This was more an oversight on his part, and a mistake, but nothing deliberate or egregious.

This is how I'd like politicians to respond when they make a mistake.

Because the Trudeau Liberals would never, ever, EVER be involved in any kind of corruption.

Life must be fun in diehard Liberal land these days knowing that your beloved party and all your beloved leaders are going to be kicked to the curb soon.

[Fuzz]

Originally Posted by Azure

Because the Trudeau Liberals would never, ever, EVER be involved in any kind of corruption.

Life must be fun in diehard Liberal land these days knowing that your beloved party and all your beloved leaders are going to be kicked to the curb soon.

Good lord you assume a lot of things.

[Azure]

Originally Posted by shotinthebacklund

Give me a break Pepsi, You and many others have repeatedly attacked PP for being unlikable, Punchable, whiny, wiener , joke, etc... these are you issues not policy driven issues. You dont like his policy or approach to policy fine, I get that. However, in this context we are talking as a person not a politician just as the context of Leblanc.



You dont have to like PP, no problem there, but dont sit on your side and call out the other for doing the same thing you have been doing for years.

I'd actually say PP has changed his perspective a lot the last few months, especially when it comes to housing (huge issue in Canada), and especially when it comes to his point that taxes, permits, etc are a huge source of the issue when it comes to the cost of housing.

Doesn't mean he'll do something about it, but at least he's talking about a part of the problem that nobody else wants to mention.

[Azure]

Originally Posted by Fuzz

Good lord you assume a lot of things.

Would love to be wrong, but anyone associated with Trudeau should be assumed to be corrupt be default given how he has run his party and all the scandals they keep getting away with.

[Fuzz]

Originally Posted by Azure

Would love to be wrong, but anyone associated with Trudeau should be assumed to be corrupt be default given how he has run his party and all the scandals they keep getting away with.

I was referring to the "beloved leaders" shtick. I don't think anyone on CP feels that way, and you would have to willfully ignore the comments in this thread that continually point out everyone is done with him.

[Yamer]

Originally Posted by Azure

Because the Trudeau Liberals would never, ever, EVER be involved in any kind of corruption.

Life must be fun in diehard Liberal land these days knowing that your beloved party and all your beloved leaders are going to be kicked to the curb soon.

You understand that you can defend a statement, policy, or politician without being a pom-pom waving bootlicker, right?

Like, you're capable of grasping that concept, correct? Because this kind of stuff gets tagged onto your posts. A lot.

[Scroopy Noopers]

Originally Posted by Yamer

You understand that you can defend a statement, policy, or politician without being a pom-pom waving bootlicker, right?

Like, you're capable of grasping that concept, correct? Because this kind of stuff gets tagged onto your posts. A lot.

No, people like this actually can’t. It’s remarkable.

[iggy_oi]

Originally Posted by Yamer

You understand that you can defend a statement, policy, or politician without being a pom-pom waving bootlicker, right?

Like, you're capable of grasping that concept, correct? Because this kind of stuff gets tagged onto your posts. A lot.

Good one Yamer.

There’s posters on here who actually voted for Trudeau at one time or another who accuse those who never voted for him of being a liberal partisan anytime they say something that isn’t attacking the party.

[PepsiFree]

Cites a poll showing basically nobody likes the Liberals.

Remains convinced he’s the lone speaker of truth fighting against diehard Liberal land.

Top stuff.

[shotinthebacklund]

Originally Posted by PepsiFree

Cites a poll showing basically nobody likes the Liberals.

Remains convinced he’s the lone speaker of truth fighting against diehard Liberal land.

Top stuff.

It would be naive to think that CP's most vocal posters are not more left wing aligned.

[GGG]

Originally Posted by shotinthebacklund

It would be naive to think that CP's most vocal posters are not more left wing aligned.

1st you are missing the center in your political spectrum. Most posters here are right of the rest of Canada on most economic issues but left of the average Albertan. Socially id agree the forum is very liberal. So Left Wing is not the correct nomenclature here.

But more importantly your reply does not make any sense in context of the posts. No one in these threads is a diehard liberal supporter and all are anti status quo.

Not liking the right shift of the conservatives does not move everyone else left.

[GGG]

Originally Posted by shotinthebacklund

It would be naive to think that CP's most vocal posters are not more left wing aligned.

1st you are missing the center in your political spectrum. Most posters here are right of the rest of Canada on most economic issues but left of the average Albertan. Socially id agree the forum is very liberal. Left Wing is not the correct nomenclature here.

But more importantly your reply does not make any sense in context of the posts. No one in these threads is a diehard liberal supporter and all are anti status quo.

Not liking the right shift of the conservatives does not move everyone else left.

[shotinthebacklund]

Originally Posted by GGG

1st you are missing the center in your political spectrum. Most posters here are right of the rest of Canada on most economic issues but left of the average Albertan. Socially id agree the forum is very liberal. So Left Wing is not the correct nomenclature here.

But more importantly your reply does not make any sense in context of the posts. No one in these threads is a diehard liberal supporter and all are anti status quo.

Not liking the right shift of the conservatives does not move everyone else left.

Dont get me wrong, I fully believe the whole Left wing/ Right wing thing is foolish as well.

The current liberal party and the NDP have drifted much further left over the last decade then their predecessors as well , so by extension supporting that party you could argue you are more left oriented as well. I would agree with you that most posters here are likely more financially conservative but I was speaking more specifically to the more vocal users.

[PepsiFree]

Originally Posted by shotinthebacklund

Dont get me wrong, I fully believe the whole Left wing/ Right wing thing is foolish as well.

But you still equated anyone left leaning with “diehard Liberals”

[shotinthebacklund]

Pepsi, thats not my quote.

[Yamer]

Originally Posted by shotinthebacklund

Dont get me wrong, I fully believe the whole Left wing/ Right wing thing is foolish as well.

The current liberal party and the NDP have drifted much further left over the last decade then their predecessors as well , so by extension supporting that party you could argue you are more left oriented as well. I would agree with you that most posters here are likely more financially conservative but I was speaking more specifically to the more vocal users.

So have the majority of conservative parties until recently. Most notably the Alberta UCP has regressed. They have made a major shift to the right socially, and the federal party seems to be emulating some of that rhetoric. Policy likely follows suit.

In that respect, wouldn't their supporters also have gone further right?

[shotinthebacklund]

Originally Posted by Yamer

So have the majority of conservative parties until recently. Most notably the Alberta UCP has regressed. They have made a major shift to the right socially, and the federal party seems to be emulating some of that rhetoric. Policy likely follows suit.

In that respect, wouldn't their supporters also have gone further right?

I think that had been established already by the original statement GGG provided

[PepsiFree]

Originally Posted by shotinthebacklund

Pepsi, thats not my quote.

Correct, but you were responding to the rejection of someone calling everyone diehard Liberals with “It would be naive to think that CP's most vocal posters are not more left wing aligned.” So either you were disagreeing with that rejection and equating the two, or you just wanted to interject with something totally irrelevant because of… reasons?